I have lived in two of the cities that made your list - Baltimore and Nashville - and you completely missed the mark in both cities.

Transamerica Tower - Baltimore

I actually had to google this because I was like "what's the Transamerica Tower?" Now I see - you mean the Legg Mason building. Hard to get a long-standing name out of your head once it's there. From a distance, the building is indeed nothing much to look at. Not really ugly, just nothing special. But the ground level is actually a serviceable Mies rip-off glass box through which a gorgeous red marble core is visible. The lack of corner offices is intentional - at the time the building was built, there wasn't much to look at except a run-down, polluted harbor. There were even huge marble plinths on every floor designed to block the view below and direct the eye outward. These were removed (minus one that an endangered bird has nested in for several years) during recent renovations.

Snodgrass Building - Nashville

Another "nothing special, but not really ugly" candidate. The building is actually a nice, clean form study. At ground level, a large, open plaza grounds the building and gives it a pleasant setting. I used to walk over and eat my lunches there.

And now for the proof of just how far you missed the mark.

William Donald Schaefer Tower - Baltimore

There apparently wasn't the budget for a sufficiently tall tower to honor our former Governor and Mayor, so they planted a big middle finger on top.

Flickr user anomalous_a

The ground level looks like something off of the set of "The Wiz" with all of its faux-copper faux-piperymsa.maryland.gov

AT&T Building - Nashville

wikipedia

Locals call it the "Batman Building" which is generous, in my estimation. Proportionally, it is very...odd. Very squat. Without the twin spires, it would be even more so. Ground level is essentially non-existent. Most street-level facades are blank slabs of granite that crowd the sidewalk. The main entrance has some grass and benches, but there is nothing particularly inviting about it.

The ATT "Batman" building is truly a dreadful WTF design. It looks like it belongs in the capital of Kyrakhikastan. It's late construction date makes it even more unforgivable some how. As for the OP's list -it's pretty ridiculous. I can think of plenty examples of far worst towers. BTW the former California Automobile Association Building in San Francisco doesn't look like that anymore. That concrete facade is gone and it's in the process of being replaced by a glass one. And your assessment of the SF skyline is like 10 years behind the the times. Other that that good on you.

The ATT "Batman" building is truly a dreadful WTF design. It looks like it belongs in the capital of Kyrakhikastan. It's late construction date makes it even more unforgivable some how. As for the OP's list -it's pretty ridiculous. I can think of plenty examples of far worst towers. BTW the former California Automobile Association Building in San Francisco doesn't look like that anymore. That concrete facade is gone and it's in the process of being replaced by a glass one. And your assessment of the SF skyline is like 10 years behind the the times. Other that that good on you.

It looks like a lot of post modern to me. Trying to break up the mass with different materials while keeping a large floor plate. I really don't see anything to get worked up over.

I don't know what all of my least favorite skyscrapers are (as I mentioned in an earlier post though, the LDS Church Office Building is hideous and worthy of being on this list), but my absolute least favorite skyscraper in history is the Aon Center in Chicago.

It's simply one of the most unimaginative building designs I have ever seen. To make it even worse, its height just dominates over everything around it. I could tolerate it if it was shorter and therefore generally blended in with the rest of the Chicago skyline, but it just sticks out there. Yuck.

I also strongly dislike pretty much every skyscraper made by Minoru Yamasaki. They're all just copy-cats of the original World Trade Center (or the WTC is copycats of them, either way they all look the same). Sorry but I just find his designs so bland, and that includes the original WTC (as iconic as they were, architecturally I found them ugly).

with the exception of passing through StP/Minn airport, I've never been to this area, but I figure these blocks might not look that bad from a distance, but up close? Only thing they got going for them is the coloured panels which seem to try to compensate for the Brutalist design.
(yikes! With the extremes in temperature up there, wouldn't one think that all that concrete has been taking on cracks over the past 40 years?)..........

....................nope. In doing a virtual walk round the neighbourhood via googlemaps street view, I found my theory doesn't hold water. They still look like towers which never had their cladding installed. They look like shit.